Riots in Xinjiang: Future of Uighers and how will China deal with it? Part 2

[tarunraju]

Link To Archived Thread

http://www.defenceforum.in/forum/as...g-future-uighers-how-will-china-deal-101.html

well, guy ,democracy is just one of many options.......

however, you seems to want to let chinese accept that "democracy" is the only way.....:blum3:

guy ,you succeed in letting Indian accept you idea! that is fine, if indian are ready to accept it.

however,india-mode is not attractive to most chinese.
We chinese don't want china to be like India today.....so..Pls don't hawk your "democracy" again,ok? I am quite tired of it.

pls read my lips: I ..dont ....buy ...it .....

Each time you people talk of democracy, why do you refer to India's shortcomings? As if India is the only democracy in the world. It's because your rulers keep telling you "we don't want to be like India"...but then guess what, the one argument that will trump them, is that democracy works in the United States, and it took them a mere 233 years to become the most powerful country in the world, and the biggest economy at that. It took China over 2000 years of successive empires and Communist rule to get this far.

 

[badguy2000]

No. I just want Chinese people to realise the truth. But as long as we can not express our opinions in Chinese media this is very difficult. So I find it very frustrating that I can only discuss with a tiny privileged Chinese minority who have access both to Chinese and western media but stubbornly refuses to condemn the ongoing brainwash and lack of freedom of the vast Chinese majority.

frankly speaking, you will get more frustrated ,if you get in touch with the common chinese who are working hard for better life quality....

To common CHinese, to get a better job and decrease corruption is much more attractive than to vote.......

you take it granted that west road(democracy+ market) is the only way and end-result.

However, I don't buy it.

To me, any mod is acceptable, as long as the mod can provide common people peace and rich life.

 

[tarunraju]

frankly speaking, you will get more frustrated ,if you get in touch with the common chinese who are working hard for better life quality....

To common CHinese, to get a better job and decrease corruption is much more attractive than to vote.......

you take it granted that west road(democracy+ market) is the only way and end-result.

However, I don't buy it.

To me, any mod is acceptable, as long as the mod can provide common people peace and rich life.
:blum3:

I'm least frustrated. If your people are working hard for the economy, good for you, and I'm all the more happy having a prosperous country next to me. But if their work isn't reaping the kind of individual gains capitalistic states have, then you know you're turning a blind eye to a big problem. There is no need to be xenophobic towards anything outside your country, particularly the west. There is a reason why the west is so powerful and prosperous. Their people don't have to work as hard as yours, and still make a lot of money. Nobody is perfect, we all learn from our shortcomings.

 

[no smoking]

No. I just want Chinese people to realise the truth. But as long as we can not express our opinions in Chinese media this is very difficult. So I find it very frustrating that I can only discuss with a tiny privileged Chinese minority who have access both to Chinese and western media but stubbornly refuses to condemn the ongoing brainwash and lack of freedom of the vast Chinese majority.

Sorry, I don't think you got more truth than commen chinese majority. Actually, both sides just get respective half of truth. Do you think the chinese has no idea what is happenning around them? Remember, most of the news within china were from chinese, since they dare tell you westners, do you think they didn't tell their chinese friends or relatives?

The truth is the majority of chinese have more important thing beyond the human right at the current stage. For you, life is so easy that you can have spare time to think about other countries' problem; for them, life is a battle, they have to stuggle to support their family, to earn their children's education fee. As long as CCP can help them economic progress, they will support it.

So, you and them are siting on the different sides of the coin.

 

[asheng312]

Each time you people talk of democracy, why do you refer to India's shortcomings? As if India is the only democracy in the world. It's because your rulers keep telling you "we don't want to be like India"...but then guess what, the one argument that will trump them, is that democracy works in the United States, and it took them a mere 233 years to become the most powerful country in the world, and the biggest economy at that. It took China over 2000 years of successive empires and Communist rule to get this far.

If democracy didn't work so well in India, why should it work in China ? Democracy works well in western world, bcoz they have long history of democracy . While in eastern world, both our country belong to , longer history of autocracy. The last two sentences make me really glad, bcoz I know you must be joking with me . Yes, American spent 233 years to become the most powerful country in the world. While look at the origin of democracy,italy, how long have it taken them ? Are they most powerful or second ? And then Japan, they become the second powerful country in the world without your powerful democracy. if with same vast land, they surely will become the first. in the 1700 years of Chinese history, maybe it is the world's most powerful. As to Communist, it took us only 60 years to become the 4th most powerful economy. Considering what happen before 1978, we should say it 30 years. Any democracy country did this before ?

 

[asheng312]

It is up to the Chinese to decide for themselves. But as they are not allowed to express themselves we cannot know what they really want.

But the Taiwanese have clearly expressed they will not accept CCP rule. So will you answer my question? Do they have to give up their freedom?

Can you express that you wanna seperate India ? if not, this is also what the CCP forbid. You r very proud of you right of voting, yes, politicians boast what they will do after they get on the stage. But will they really do ? Never have their promises come in to nothing but ticks ? Everyone of you have the right to vote, but who r the ones that made final decision. your voted politicians do. if they speak one way and do the other, what vote really means to you ? CCP is a large quantity, 600 000 000 people in China. from every level. farmers, workers, teachers, professors, college student,businessman, governer, even when you go to a little remote village, you will find some farmers r one member of CCP. they have to be excelent in their job to be a member of CCP. So it is not quite accurate to say that CCP rules people of China, better saying that people rules themselves.
Taiwanese have some priviladge on mainland and CCP. just as what HK used to be. Now,can anyone say that HKnese gived up their freedom ? Didn't they live a better life ?

 

[nitesh]

If democracy didn't work so well in India

That's a ridiculous statement. How u can say it does not work?

 

[yuebaili]

Can you express that you wanna seperate India ? if not, this is also what the CCP forbid. You r very proud of you right of voting, yes, politicians boast what they will do after they get on the stage. But will they really do ? Never have their promises come in to nothing but ticks ? Everyone of you have the right to vote, but who r the ones that made final decision. your voted politicians do. if they speak one way and do the other, what vote really means to you ? CCP is a large quantity, 600 000 000 people in China. from every level. farmers, workers, teachers, professors, college student,businessman, governer, even when you go to a little remote village, you will find some farmers r one member of CCP. they have to be excelent in their job to be a member of CCP. So it is not quite accurate to say that CCP rules people of China, better saying that people rules themselves.
Taiwanese have some priviladge on mainland and CCP. just as what HK used to be. Now,can anyone say that HKnese gived up their freedom ? Didn't they live a better life ?

I don´t know how much freedom of speech there is in India. But we have freedom of speech in Sweden. Maybe India is not as democratic as my country. Of course in a democracy one should be allowed to express any idea.

I don´t understand what you mean with "Taiwanese have some priviladge on mainland and CCP". Taiwan is independent today.
As for HK it used to belong to Britain. The lasr governor, Chris Patten, gave HK a democratic system. But China abolished it. So today only parts of the HK parliament is elected by the people. And Beijing decides who will be the Chief Executive. So of course HK had to give up their freedom.

 

[tarunraju]

If democracy didn't work so well in India, why should it work in China?

No, it's working pretty well. People have abundant freedom (political and of expression), and considering we are a nation that was broken into pieces in 1947 and had to literally start from scratch amidst riots, we've come a long way. However, I can prove that we're better off with democracy than communism. In the states of Kerela and West Bengal, where there have been successive CPI-M governments, the development is stunted, and the educated youth usually prefer to migrate to other states for work. Kolkata (Calcutta) has pretty much gone into coma since its so called "communist revolution". Back in the 50's it was regarded as the one true competitor to Mumbai (Bombay).

 

[asheng312]

I don´t know how much freedom of speech there is in India. But we have freedom of speech in Sweden. Maybe India is not as democratic as my country. Of course in a democracy one should be allowed to express any idea.

I don´t understand what you mean with "Taiwanese have some priviladge on mainland and CCP". Taiwan is independent today.
As for HK it used to belong to Britain. The lasr governor, Chris Patten, gave HK a democratic system. But China abolished it. So today only parts of the HK parliament is elected by the people. And Beijing decides who will be the Chief Executive. So of course HK had to give up their freedom.

Even in your country, I still daubt your right to seperate your country. Maybe you would say that all your people love your country, no one would ever do this. well, different people means different things, just like ireland seperate not bcoz British is not powerful enough or not so democracy.
I mean, just like a great writer in Taiwan called Lee au said:Taiwan is a tiny island, which leads to narrow sight. The new born taiwanese tend to treasure their so called democracy and freedom more than embracing great mainland. I'm sure you will not understand our feeling for Taiwan deep in the heart of every Chinese, so this is the end.
HK benefit quite a lot of mainland economy development. in 1997's Finance crisis, unlike singapore or korea or other countries ,HK pass with quite little pain and bounced quickly. Chief Executiveselected by Beijing is nothing wrong. Anyway they are HK politician, we don't wanna to see a seperist in the position of governing HK.
As to democracy, I still think economics is the first and most important things. Like now, if a country's economy is a democracy country and badly stricken by the crisis, all an ordinary person can do is to use his right to express his wish to have a job. However if development was maintained, it doesn't matter if he has the right to express or not because he has a job.

 

[asheng312]

If democracy is working well in India, dictatorship is also working well in China.with history proving it .We r not comparing communism and capitalism (maybe not expressed in this way,hehe ) but whether or not it is right for China to maintain dictatorship.China have abandoned communism just like most countries. and began to stick to more realistic things.that is economy.

 

[yuebaili]

HK benefit quite a lot of mainland economy development. in 1997's Finance crisis, unlike singapore or korea or other countries ,HK pass with quite little pain and bounced quickly. Chief Executiveselected by Beijing is nothing wrong. Anyway they are HK politician, we don't wanna to see a seperist in the position of governing HK.
As to democracy, I still think economics is the first and most important things. Like now, if a country's economy is a democracy country and badly stricken by the crisis, all an ordinary person can do is to use his right to express his wish to have a job. However if development was maintained, it doesn't matter if he has the right to express or not because he has a job.

You may think so. But most people in HK disagree:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/02/world/asia/02hongkong.html

HONG KONG — Thousands of people joined a pro-democracy march here on Wednesday, although the turnout fell short of a candlelight vigil held nearly four weeks ago to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown in Beijing.

 

[nimo_cn]

As for HK it used to belong to Britain. The lasr governor, Chris Patten, gave HK a democratic system. But China abolished it. So today only parts of the HK parliament is elected by the people. And Beijing decides who will be the Chief Executive. So of course HK had to give up their freedom.

When Brititain was ruling HK, the governor was only appointed by the queen and he was only second to the queen in HK, it was not untill China got HK back that HK people got their own Chief Executive.
And you are telling us Britain's way is more democratic than China's? What a joke!

 

[tarunraju]

I think HK's governor general was nominated by the British Parliament, and appointed by The Queen. So She's only the executive (rubber-stamp) part of it. India's executive system is similar. The Parliament nominates something, and the President rubber-stamps it.


yay, I'm 1st Lt.

 

[yuebaili]

Please read what I wrote!
I was not discussing the British colonial system - which of course was undemocratic.
I wanted to point out that Chis Patten gave HK democracy. But China abolished it.
And the results of HK elections clearly show that HK wants the democracy that Beijing denies them..

 

[nitesh]

He is trying to say that HK was previously colony of UK now a colony of CCP. And as usual CCP is the best.

 

[nimo_cn]

Please read what I wrote!
I was not discussing the British colonial system - which of course was undemocratic.
I wanted to point out that Chis Patten gave HK democracy. But China abolished it.
And the results of HK elections clearly show that HK wants the democracy that Beijing denies them..

It is great you admit that the way Britain was ruling HK was undemocratic.

Britain had ruled HK for more 100 years, and during the time before Christopher Francis Patten, HK was ruled in this undemocratic way. It is funny that it was not until 1992, after China and British reached the agreement about the destiny of HK, that the last governor of HK became so generous to sell something they called democracy to the people of HK. So i am wondering what the hell were they doing before that?

 

[badguy2000]

???????????7.5?????????????

26 suspects accused of fire-setting,murdering and robbing on July 5th by Xinjiang Procuratorate.

Of the 26 suspects, 24 are Uyghurs and 2 are Hans.....most of them may be sentenced to death , I think.

 

[yuebaili]

It is great you admit that the way Britain was ruling HK was undemocratic.

Britain had ruled HK for more 100 years, and during the time before Christopher Francis Patten, HK was ruled in this undemocratic way. It is funny that it was not until 1992, after China and British reached the agreement about the destiny of HK, that the last governor of HK became so generous to sell something they called democracy to the people of HK. So i am wondering what the hell were they doing before that?

I cannot see what is so great about my admiting that the British rule of HK was undemocratic. It is as obvious as that China is a dictatorship today.
But it is also obvious that HK and Macao do not wish to be ruled by CCP. Neither do Tibetans and Uighurs and lots of Han Chinese. But maybe most Han chauvinists are happy with CCP rule.

 

[no smoking]

I cannot see what is so great about my admiting that the British rule of HK was undemocratic. It is as obvious as that China is a dictatorship today.
But it is also obvious that HK and Macao do not wish to be ruled by CCP. Neither do Tibetans and Uighurs and lots of Han Chinese. But maybe most Han chauvinists are happy with CCP rule.

It is no news for the mainland chinese, the HK and Macao want democracy. But the problem is their economy is so deeply integrated into china's economy circle. So majority of them still want to stay in China. Just as I said, democracy doesn't solve economic problem.